“Fossil-fueled development is the greatest benefactor our environment has ever known.”
– The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels
Oil is the lifeblood of the American economy. It powers our cars, generates electricity, and allows us a level of mobility unseen in world history. In fact, 66 percent of American transportation presently runs on oil, based on a 2020 US EIA report. Yet President Biden, on his first day in office, lost no time revoking the permit for the Keystone Pipeline, despite its safest means of distributing much-needed oil around the US. And since for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction, thousands of jobs were lost, while gas prices began to explode.
As recently as 2019, more than 80 percent of both energy production and consumption came from three categories of fossil fuels: coal, natural gas, and oil. Fossil fuels have consistently remained America’s energy leader by being plentiful, cheap, and reliable. Since 1980, the fraction of gas, oil, and coal used to meet American’s needs has dropped only a mere percentage point or two, despite constant claims that renewable energy has increased capacity. Renewables, like solar and wind, serve only as a backup, due to their intermittent, costly, and resource-laden qualities, making them supplements at best, not replacements.
Catastrophic climate claims continue to ignore the improvements society has made in reducing both poverty and carbon emissions. Technology has not only extended fossil fuel capacity many times over but has also alleviated many of its negative effects. In the past 50 years, we have produced more oil, more natural gas, and more coal. Yet allegations of resource depletion and unlivable conditions abound, ranging from running out of oil, to famines and catastrophic death counts, to cities and countries disappearing from the map. In reality, the only thing that has vanished is the environmentalist’s mascot, the polar bear, which was covertly scrubbed from all their propaganda following its inconvenient resurgence.
The more gas, oil, and coal we use, the more improvements we’ve seen. China and India's rapid growth relied almost entirely on coal and oil alone, with fossil fuels representing 85 and 80 percent, respectively. And despite its malevolent reputation, clean coal still provides 41 percent of the world’s energy. Yet, green activists continue to claim we are making our environment unlivable by using fossil fuels. But the opposite is actually true. Our environment was unlivable by default until we started transforming raw materials into much-desired energy. In the last 40 years as the world has doubled its use of fossil fuels, poverty dropped by 80 percent. Climate doomers who fail to update their claims based on current conditions, look only at the risks, but never the benefits.
Going green rarely means green in the sense of sustainability, but more often reflects green in the sense of dollars. Electric cars currently represent less than 2 percent of vehicles in the United States, and 3 percent worldwide, based on a Bloomberg report. Yet, eco-advocates continue to manufacture mineral-laden batteries supported largely by coal or diesel electricity. With electric vehicles costing 20 to 80 percent more, government subsidies (ala taxpayer money) continue to be offered to increase sales. Making wealthy electric car owners disproportionately the recipients of public grift.
In Alex Epstein’s 2014 book, “The Moral Case for Fossil Fuels”, Epstein discusses fossil fuels as a moral issue, not a political or environmental concern. In his philosophical case for extending our use of fossil fuels, Epstein hails the significant benefit that coal, oil, and natural gas have contributed to improving the lives of billions of people. He argues that more energy from fossil fuels, not less, is needed to adequately supply not only our own needs but those in developing countries worldwide.
Human flourishing is the ability for individuals to reach their potential. Not just in the first world, but the whole world. The green lobby wants to make nature the best it can be at the expense of human life. They want to save the planet from humankind, not improve the earth for human existence. In so doing, they propose lower living standards and less prosperity, all while they continue to ignore how human ingenuity has successfully improved and extended life, and at the same time increased the quality of the environment. Through conservation and innovation, man has and is mastering the universe.
A popular Internet meme says: “Truth does not mind being questioned, but a lie does not like being challenged.” Skepticism and questioning are a necessary part of science. The truth is the world needs more energy, not less. There are still countries that lack suitable resources for their citizens to thrive. We need to increase energy, not talk about taking it away. Fossil fuels can provide ongoing energy for the United States, and the world, for the foreseeable future. As long as their benefits significantly outweigh their risk, there is no reason to deny mankind its bounty.
Comentarios